This photo cost $6,612.

Cant tell you how many times I've had to 'educate' my clients on this....good article
 
If he's going to look at it like that, then he should just rent the equipment and by his standards each picture would be cheaper.
 
Cory Braun said:
If he's going to look at it like that, then he should just rent the equipment and by his standards each picture would be cheaper.
Click to expand...

It would still be a several hundred dollar photo. While he's being a bit extreme, his point is that it isn't free.
 
Dave © said:
It would still be a several hundred dollar photo. While he's being a bit extreme, his point is that it isn't free.
Click to expand...

We all understand what he's trying to say, but he's wayyyy more than a bit extreme.

By his logic, someone buying a single nail at a hardware store would need to pay millions $$ to cover for the price of the store and for the mining company for all their drilling equipment used to get the metals out of the ground. And let's not forget to pay all those salaries...

Again, I know what he means but his rant is goofy.
 
Denis Haineault said:
We all understand what he's trying to say, but he's wayyyy more than a bit extreme.

By his logic, someone buying a single nail at a hardware store would need to pay millions $$ to cover for the price of the store and for the mining company for all their drilling equipment used to get the metals out of the ground. And let's not forget to pay all those salaries...

Again, I know what he means but his rant is goofy.
Click to expand...

He's talking about damages - what it costs to duplicate that exact picture - not what it costs to buy it.

Using the hardware store example, it is very cheap to buy a single nail. But it would be something different to steal the idea of this copyrighted nail (it's a very special nail) and make your own nails. That's infringement, not purchasing, so the copyright holder can sue for damages.

It makes total sense what he's saying.
 
Jordan Scott Price said:
He's talking about damages - what it costs to duplicate that exact picture - not what it costs to buy it.

Using the hardware store example, it is very cheap to buy a single nail. But it would be something different to steal the idea of this copyrighted nail (it's a very special nail) and make your own nails. That's infringement, not purchasing, so the copyright holder can sue for damages.

It makes total sense what he's saying.
Click to expand...
Agreed!
 
Jordan Scott Price said:
He's talking about damages - what it costs to duplicate that exact picture - not what it costs to buy it.

Using the hardware store example, it is very cheap to buy a single nail. But it would be something different to steal the idea of this copyrighted nail (it's a very special nail) and make your own nails. That's infringement, not purchasing, so the copyright holder can sue for damages.

It makes total sense what he's saying.
Click to expand...

Fair enough.

But I guess this part:

"THIS single photo didn’t cost me $6,612, but if you wanted to create it, from scratch, that is what is involved."

Is what I singled out on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top